2020
DOI: 10.31744/einstein_journal/2020ao5132
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison between enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and indirect immunofluorescence for detection of antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibodies

Abstract: Comparison between enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and indirect immunofluorescence for detection of antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibodies Comparação entre os métodos de ensaio imunoenzimático e imunoflurescência indireta para a pesquisa de anticorpos anticitoplasma de neutrófilos

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
3
0
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
0
3
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Menezes et al found the sensitivity and specificity of ELISA to be 62 and 99%, respectively, in concordance with our findings. 12 However, Harris et al found ELISA to be technically superior to IIF with a specificity of 97% and a positive predictive value of 73%, compared with 90% and 50% of IIF. 15 Similarly, another study also observed superior PPV of ELISA compared with that of ELISA (83 vs. 45%).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Menezes et al found the sensitivity and specificity of ELISA to be 62 and 99%, respectively, in concordance with our findings. 12 However, Harris et al found ELISA to be technically superior to IIF with a specificity of 97% and a positive predictive value of 73%, compared with 90% and 50% of IIF. 15 Similarly, another study also observed superior PPV of ELISA compared with that of ELISA (83 vs. 45%).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…5,9 Nonetheless, some researchers expressed the opinion that best results (specificity as high as 99%) could be achieved by combining the results of IIF with that of ELISA (C-ANCA-PR3 ELISA and P-ANCA-MPO-ELISA). [12][13][14] However, employing both the test may not be feasible in resource-limited diagnostic settings. In this study, we tried to assess the diagnostic accuracy of currently available ELISA technique compared with results of IIF.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Золотым стандартом выявления АНЦА сегодня считают антиген-специфический ИФА, позволяющий определить содержание ПР3-АНЦА и МПО-АНЦА. Постановка реакции непрямой иммунофлюоресценции (НИФ) перед проведением антиген-специфического ИФА не является обязательным этапом определения АНЦА при подозрении на ААВ [8], хотя необходимо учитывать возможность ложноотрицательных результатов этого метода исследования [24,25]. Соответственно, при отрицательном результате антиген-специфического ИФА могут быть использованы метод НИФ [26], а также ИФА-тесты второго и третьего поколений (capture и anchor) [27].…”
Section: Discussionunclassified
“…Determination of the patient serum monamines and amino acid neurotransmitters, including dopamine (dopamine, DA), norepinephrine (norepinephrine, NE), 5-serotamine (5-hydroxytruptamine,5-HT) and amino acid neurotransmitters including glutamate (glutamatem, Glu) and glycine (glycine, Gly). Enzymatic-linked immunosorption method was used ( Menezes et al, 2020 ). Patient serum inflammatory factor levels, including interleukin-1 β (interleukin-1 β, IL-1 β), interleukin-6 (interleukin-6, IL-6), and swelling necrosis factor- α (tumor necrosis factor- α, TNF- α)…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%